Shivani Kabra gives us an interpretation of the Section 354C in light of foreign jurisdictions of Canada, Australia, United Kingdom and District of Columbia Code.
Abstract
The recently amended Indian Penal Code provides for an independent provision, §354 C, to criminalize the act of voyeurism. Owing to its recent addition, the provision has not been interpreted or analyzed in detail. Hence, the primary focus of this paper is the interpretation of Section 354C in light of foreign jurisdictions of Canada (Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46)), Australia (Crimes Act 1900 – SECT 91J), United Kingdom (Sexual Offenses Act, 2003 S. 63) and District of Columbia Code (DC Code: Omnibus Public Safety Amendment Act, 2006). The right to privacy has not been specifically defined in the Indian legal sphere but has only been read in as a constitutional right for the purpose of Civilian- State surveillance. However, it lacks a separate recognition of an independent right not only against State supervision but also against civilian supervision. Curiously, the offence of voyeurism seeks to protect private acts of individuals under a legal structure that refuses to acknowledge privacy rights. Owing to such logical inconsistencies, it is pertinent to delineate on this subject and attempt to explain the same in light of recent developments. Therefore, the main objective of the author is to characterize and interpret the current statuesque of the crime in Indian jurisdiction while verifying the utility of the clause against foreign case laws.